I know, I read the article.

What is not on YouTube is literally every other part of the story. For what we know (as described in the article), it's possible that the student was always calm and rational, or that he screamed abuse at the top of the lungs to university staff; or anything in between. We simply don't know (as described in the article), so it's quite manipulative to describe the university refuting the student's claims as "gaslighting".

Please note that I said that siding completely with the student is premature. I stand by that. If everything the student alleges is true, it is an outrageous story. However, it is very clear that this article was written as outrage porn. So we should wait and see what the court conclude actually happened. After all, it's not like this is a timely case, the incident happened over two years ago.

Please don't quote less than half a sentence and then be surprised that it doesn't make sense.

Also, that we can't now either way is exactly my point. We can't disprove either the student's nor the university's misconduct. Maybe ask yourself why you instantly see that when it comes to the student, but fail to see the exact same thing in regards to the defendants.

Well, the good thing is that the court will actually decide the facts and merits. With evidence and deliberation and reason and all those good things.

The audio is available, there's an injustice in my opinion. In either case it will be judged and tried. But the likely outcome is a victory on kieran side. You can't just kick a medical student over critical thinking

No, if that's what happened, that's indefensible. But that's only what the plaintiff alleges.

Wouldn't critical thinking also mean that you should keep in mind that an expelled student describing the situation in his legal complaint will be necessarily be biased? The complaint is literally written in the way that is best for his case.

I can't find it, could you please provide a link?

Thanks!